Sources: Sanders believes a woman can’t win

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

48 minutes ago, Whispering said:

Biden has been a Democrat longer than Bernie has had a real job. Biden was a Congressman when Bernie was a deadbeat dad and stealing electricity from his neighbors. 

If anyone has “infiltrated” the Democratic Party, it would be Bernie.

This is divisive. We are a wide tent in the Democratic party with a lot of nuance and we need to work together if we want to beat trump. Calling some Democrats not Democrats isn't helping  

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

47 minutes ago, Florin said:

Sometimes I get the impressions, some of Bernie supporters hate more Biden, Obama, Hillary, Pete than Trump.

 

Wake up people. This only has to do with Bernie and Warren. Stop changing the subject and accept that Bernie cant prove he didnt say it like Warren cant prove that he did it. It is all about feelings and this is the prove that a lot Bernie supporters have more feelings than facts. 

This is naive as hell. I want the Democratic party to be a party that is a party for the people itself, not corporate interests and their own pockets. Does that really mean I don't know that Joe Biden is not a devout, proud racist bigot and a pathological liar? Is that really what you're saying?

We're talking about Nuance here.

I'm saying that yes, 10 is higher than  -10, but 50 is also higher than 10.

The primary season is when we should be striving for more than just a net 0.

 

 

[Bt1 5,213]

52 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

This is divisive. We are a wide tent in the Democratic party with a lot of nuance and we need to work together if we want to beat trump. Calling some Democrats not Democrats isn't helping  

You miss the point. Correct the first comment that said that Biden, pete and others aren't democrats, not on a decent response to that wrong comment. 

[Whispering 18,865]

57 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

This is divisive. We are a wide tent in the Democratic party with a lot of nuance and we need to work together if we want to beat trump. Calling some Democrats not Democrats isn't helping  

I agree.

  

   8 hours ago,  ItsTommyBitch said: 

1) Sanders supporters would tell you that some people running for the Democratic nomination have Conservative political beliefs that are closer to Republicans than traditional Democrats. Are they just lying or what? 

 

They obviously aren’t helping. 

 

5 hours ago,  Bae said:

Pete and Biden are Republicans who have infiltrated the Democratic Party to move it further to the right, so you won’t be seeing me uniting with his supporters. 

 

[Andy McQueen 4,484]

Sure, Jane 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

55 minutes ago, Whispering said:

I agree.

   8 hours ago,  ItsTommyBitch said: 

1) Sanders supporters would tell you that some people running for the Democratic nomination have Conservative political beliefs that are closer to Republicans than traditional Democrats. Are they just lying or what? 

They obviously aren’t helping. 

5 hours ago,  Bae said:

Pete and Biden are Republicans who have infiltrated the Democratic Party to move it further to the right, so you won’t be seeing me uniting with his supporters. 

This is hypocrisy, that was my point   The general "you" is saying "Look Bernie Bros are all ideologues who only exist on twitter that hate Biden, believe in purity politics, want Trump to win, and won't accept anyone but their Savior Bernie Sanders as a viable candidate and they will cost us the election" and then saying "We need everyone in this to win" in the same breath. It's almost like, slandering large groups of potential voters is a terrible political move?

If you don't see the problem with both of these observations, I can't help you with that.

If Biden wants to be the nominee, he should be prepared for Trump to attack him based on his record as a "politician" because Trump supporters still see him as an "outsider"

Bernie Sanders + fans pointing that out is not divisive, its smart. I actually probably want to beat Trump MORE than most people in my mind, because I want us to be smart in how we go about it. If we "want to beat Trump" then we should be honest and ask tough questions now rather than flail our arms about all of these hits that come out later. I don't want to leave it to chance and hope that people waking up to how bad he is will be enough to encourage them to go out to the polls. That makes 0 sense to me. Let's not screw up our 1 chance @ beating Trump by running someone who is especially vulnerable to Trump's style of attacks What the hell is wrong with that?

Therefore, it is relevant to point out that his voting record and some of his actions, words, etc. are particularly Conservative, because there is the risk that these things will damage his chances of winning re: Obama-Trump voters that we need to win back in order to win.

Now, if you actually have something substantive as a rebuttal to my position beyond "I disagree" (so like, a reason why u disagree that is not out of thin air), This is where you should say so. Otherwise, I don't care to play this game with you because its a waste of both of our times. Your past posting history re: Responding to my positions no matter how simple or elaborate or sourced has usually not been fruitful. 

1 hour ago, Florin said:

You miss the point. Correct the first comment that said that Biden, pete and others aren't democrats, not on a decent response to that wrong comment. 

I care about facts. Is Joe Biden *literally* a Republican? No, the only thing that makes someone a Democrat or Republican in America is party registration and ultimately who you campaign with. You are X by saying "I am X" and no one can take that away from you. Nancy Pelosi cannot swing her gavel and declare any individual Not a Democrat. No such apparatus exists.

By this same logic, Bernie is running as a Democrat and that makes him a Democrat. However, you would note that this typically does not persuade "he's not a Democrat!!!?!?!" people. They say he's a Democrat by name only... and then when people point out that yes, hes ran as an Independent before, but ideologically he is 100% aligned with the Democrats in terms of his moral values and beliefs, they just... don't care  He hasn't had a D by his name for 50 years, despite doing Democratic things his entire life, often more than people who DO have the "D" by their name going back to the 70s.

Those same people get offended if we say that unlike Bernie, who is ideologically equivalent to the Democratic party and always has been, Joe Biden has some Conservative values and a voting record that in many ways does not resemble a Democrat. This is this whole kerfuffle in a nutshell

It's a ****ing trap.

This is just like social justice and respectability politics.

And it does not matter how politely I say "hey, maybe we should see how Joe Biden defends his voting record, because I think it might hurt him in the general" lets say I'm not even a Sanders fan, I'm a Yang fan, and I also just believe that Joe has some weaknesses that we aren't talking about enough. Again, I care because I want to win, and I'm nervous that we aren't being harsh enough on the candidates.

The response? Immediately, I'm being divisive, im contributing to factionalism, I'm the reason we're going to lose in 2020, I just need to be quiet and have no objections ever about anything, but I need to absolutely make sure that I still vote for Joe or whoever the nominee is no matter whether they believe in anything I believe at all.

That argument is good enough for some people, but for the vast majority of the country that does not vote, it clearly is not. I'm saying let's just have a good ****ing argument to get people to vote. Gosh, I'm so radical  

~~~

Also, I don't spend my time trying to tell people their feelings aren't valid or don't matter re: individuals saying Joe Biden is a Republican, Republican Lite.

But, to be frank, I'm too informed to pretend that I don't understand why they say that. It's not Not true, and if someone would like to point out to me some facts that show that Joe Biden by his own voting record + political stances would NOT be considered a Republican in ideology in many places in the world including the U.S. at some point, I would be glad to hear those facts, but this has never, ever, ever been the response to this point.

And I'm too informed to pretend to believe that pointing out what makes 2 people different in a Primary politically is the same thing as saying "X is a racist, transphobe, sexist liar who doesn't care about people and is only running to make themselves more powerful"

I just can't dumb myself down to make this point because it actually is NOT a good point.

 

[Guillaume Hamon 6,984]

13 hours ago, Whispering said:

Now, now, the Bernieites would tell you that everyone but Bernie is a “Republican”.

Actually no most wouldn't. They would say they're close to republicans on some issues rather than labeling them "republicans" overall. A term I actually quite often saw was centrist.  

13 hours ago, Whispering said:

The only Democrat in this race is someone who has never been a Democrat. Lol

Some people who never had their cart for a political party can represent its ideas just as fine ( with their vote record and actions ) as the ones who were in the party forever... And that's why democrats voters don't seem to care about that. The only ones who try to make it a problem are the folks who wish that Sanders will not win in the first place.

14 hours ago, Faysalaaa said:

Literally nobody has this opinion

Oh Keepbreathing often make up stuffs so this user knows that it's BS to says these ideas circulate here. I blocked him to read something else than slanders in the comments lol.

[Guillaume Hamon 6,984]

11 hours ago, Halsey said:

This sounds like the stuff Trumpsters say about The Donald.

Bernie Bros here being just as bad as Republicans

 

11 hours ago, Halsey said:

Doesn’t change the fact he said them.

The irony of calling some unproved rumor a "fact" then complaining about Bernie voters being like Trumpsters...

It's incredible how dishonest some anti-Bernie folsk are here...

Not only here actually, everywhere.

[Guillaume Hamon 6,984]

5 hours ago, KleinGa said:

Misogynistic Bernie finally coming out. Not that different from his fans

This smear never worked yet you're still pushing for it lmao...

6 hours ago, Bae said:

She lied about her heritage, flip flopped on multiple issues including the most important (health care), is voting for Trump’s military budgets which supported the unauthorized murder of Soleimani, and is on tv making statements about debunked non-events.

But some anti-Bernie folks here will tell you that you have to be INSANE to not see she's soooooo anti-establishment when the polish is already cracking...

[Guillaume Hamon 6,984]

4 hours ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Furthermore, the average "Bernie Bro" is probably a mid twenties Latina woman or a Working class person that makes <50k a year, just by the facts of polling demographics, so have fun with that one!

They know it well they just have this "only white guys vote Sanders" narrative to push so they'll repeat the smear despite all the stats out there... 

KleinGa is never honest in his comments even after being told the stats about Sanders voters so it's a waste of time cause this user won't hear and fake not seing it lol.

2 hours ago, Whispering said:

3. I stand by my statement, the purity tests are cult-like and shortsighted. That’s what’s silly. 

The mistrust towards candidates is often justified with their records showing they only recently joined progressive positions, at least for some subjects. Of course folks look in their past and will not like them cause they started acting a certain way now Sanders or AOC made it popular.

That's not even a purity test, that's asking yourself who's probably switching cause its convenient now without having much of a spine and who looks more trustworthy when he stands for these certain subjects. 

I saw nobody here saying they would vote Trump if it wasn't sanders who's getting the nom' and them wishing to have someone who seem to sincerely defend their ideas and actually fully did so in his career is normal. Mainly when they already voted for many people who often weren't standing it for it along the years when you see their path.

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

This whole recent debate just tells me that despite the so-called "wokeness" of the Democratic party, they actually don't know ANYTHING about why they have lost any elections ever, why some people dislike the Democrats, why over a hundred million people in this country NEVER vote or rarely vote, etc.

It is actually *quite* simple:

They have seen decades of examples of the incompetence of both parties of actually doing what they say they will do, and they have seen lifetimes worth of evidence that indicates that Politicians do not have consistent values or track records, and will actively lie to them in order to get power, wealth, acclaim, etc. and will constantly betray their voters.

There's no way you don't know that "politician" is a negatively charged label, or that the most common stereotypes about politicians are "self-serving" "duplicitous" "pandering" "lying" "flip-flopping" etc. We all live in somewhat the same culture in America here, and there aren't really bubble cities and states where everyone loves politics  

So, why the hell do you think brow-beating these people who are often times poor, uneducated, and lacking resources because of our political system and bullying them into voting is going to work? That makes 0 sense  We don't have to look back far in our electoral history to know that the main reason people support any candidate for any office is because of a vision they believe in, representation for ideas they believe in, a positive message, etc. They appeal to their constituency. "The opposition is worse" has always, always been a weak, losing argument in terms of getting excitement into politics. It's not 0% effective, but its not enough. 

So, the way to get people to vote is similarly simple. Let's appeal to those people, and lets spend massive amounts of money increasing voter registration, combating gerrymandering and voter suppression, and spreading awareness of politics, getting young people to vote while they are still in school, and make it a cultural norm.

If you aren't going to support politicians who believe in what I've just said, then you must accept that nothing is going to *change* - We're going to keep having this happen, FOREVER unless we just take a step back, say Look this system is broken, and we should stop talking about fixing it, and actually fix it.

That's why I support Bernie Sanders, because he isn't just making vapid promises he'll change his mind on next year when it doesn't poll so well, he has values and integrity and willpower. He isn't perfect, but on this issue, there is no one else running who compares.

Sorry for my rant. This has been a DAY  I skipped my phone calling shift but I'm picking up extras to compensate. We're going to make 5,000,000 phone calls in Iowa about caucusing, lets ****ing go  

[Eggsy 8,280]

14 hours ago, Brainiac said:

Agree to disagree. Unless I hear it with my own ears, I refuse to believe Bernie Sanders would ever say something like that based on the person that I know he is. It's looking more and more likely that the Warren campaign took something and blew it up into something it wasn't anyway.

I agree thats its unlikely for sure. The thing that gets me is that they sat on this for so long to only bring it up now.

[Ladey Gaygay 9,321]

So we cancelling people for something they said 32 years ago?

Warren still labels herself as a capitalist and her supposed benefits such as college and healthcare would barely put a dent in people's debts

[Economy 52,844]

5 hours ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

This whole recent debate just tells me that despite the so-called "wokeness" of the Democratic party, they actually don't know ANYTHING about why they have lost any elections ever, why some people dislike the Democrats, why over a hundred million people in this country NEVER vote or rarely vote, etc.

It is actually *quite* simple:

They have seen decades of examples of the incompetence of both parties of actually doing what they say they will do, and they have seen lifetimes worth of evidence that indicates that Politicians do not have consistent values or track records, and will actively lie to them in order to get power, wealth, acclaim, etc. and will constantly betray their voters.

There's no way you don't know that "politician" is a negatively charged label, or that the most common stereotypes about politicians are "self-serving" "duplicitous" "pandering" "lying" "flip-flopping" etc. We all live in somewhat the same culture in America here, and there aren't really bubble cities and states where everyone loves politics  

So, why the hell do you think brow-beating these people who are often times poor, uneducated, and lacking resources because of our political system and bullying them into voting is going to work? That makes 0 sense  We don't have to look back far in our electoral history to know that the main reason people support any candidate for any office is because of a vision they believe in, representation for ideas they believe in, a positive message, etc. They appeal to their constituency. "The opposition is worse" has always, always been a weak, losing argument in terms of getting excitement into politics. It's not 0% effective, but its not enough. 

So, the way to get people to vote is similarly simple. Let's appeal to those people, and lets spend massive amounts of money increasing voter registration, combating gerrymandering and voter suppression, and spreading awareness of politics, getting young people to vote while they are still in school, and make it a cultural norm.

If you aren't going to support politicians who believe in what I've just said, then you must accept that nothing is going to *change* - We're going to keep having this happen, FOREVER unless we just take a step back, say Look this system is broken, and we should stop talking about fixing it, and actually fix it.

That's why I support Bernie Sanders, because he isn't just making vapid promises he'll change his mind on next year when it doesn't poll so well, he has values and integrity and willpower. He isn't perfect, but on this issue, there is no one else running who compares.

Sorry for my rant. This has been a DAY  I skipped my phone calling shift but I'm picking up extras to compensate. We're going to make 5,000,000 phone calls in Iowa about caucusing, lets ****ing go  

I agree with a lot of what u said but I also wanna add that a lot of the Democrats loosing the last election was also just bad luck

 

Hillary did still win popular votes by quite a wide margin so Democrats still took the people's votes

 

Trump was very lucky that in some swing states he literally won the electorial votes by a thin margin while Democrats won some areas by a heavier concentration but a higher concentration has no benefit

 

This is why I think the US system is very flawed.

 

My Country isn't perfect either. The parliamentary seat system in Canada makes it possible for a party that didn't get the most votes to still win in Some cases...

 

But it's rarely by the kind of margins you see in the US tho 

 

Cuz here the winning party with the most seats, their leader automatically becomes prime minister (unlike in the US where the house can have the non-president party can have more seats which happened this last mid-term)... And we divide each seat for the house of commons by region. If you win in a province you don't get all their votes, you still only get seats by the region you won

 

And since the party with most seats automatically gets the prime minister, it's hard to become prime Minister while loosing popular vote by a very big margin unless the redistribution of the votes was really concentrated in specific regions by a lot

[PoshLife 17,019]

I was so certain Sen. Gillibrand was going to say something about this that I almost inb4'd it yesterday.

This story has really hit a nerve in a way that the GGD Bernie Bros aren't fully appreciating. Just about every female senator has had people tell them they can't do something because of their gender, as have many women in general. I don't think any of them are particularly surprised to hear that, yes, even a progressive like Bernie Sanders could question whether a woman can win. It's what men do. All the time.

By the way, Politico had a really fascinating article about what just isn't connecting (so far) for Sen. Klobuchar, and it went straight at the gender issue. It's a terrific and unnerving read and I highly recommend it: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/01/14/amy-klobuchar-2020-campaign-profile-democrats-iowa-098476

I won't be surprised if Sen. Klobuchar keeps this issue alive tonight, regardless of how Sanders and Warren respond to it. But the moderators are doing malpractice if this isn't one of the first three questions of the night.